Multi-license - won't it conflict?

[M.I.Z Khalid]

Thank you all for your inputs. I'm no lawyer either :)

>From this thread of mails, I've observed that:

1. If I'm the copyright owner, I can re-license it in any way I like. And it
won't conflict.

2. GPL is a commercial license.

But I'd like to know is specifically, where in the GPL text does it mention
these above points.

Thanks again!
Khalid, Sri Lanka


On 18 April 2011 10:41, Karl Fogel <kfogel at red-bean.com> wrote:

> "M.I.Z Khalid" <itsols at gmail.com> writes:
> >I'm a little concerned AND in doubt about how a SINGLE GPLe'd program
> >can carry a COMMERCIAL license. My specific questions are:
> >
> >1. Where does it indicate in the GPL v3, that only the original
> >copyright owner can issue a dual license?
> >
> >2. This may be answered above but if not, where does the GPL v3
> >prevent a forked project or redistribution being issued ALONG with a
> >commercial license BY A DEVELOPER, who is NOT the original copyright
> >owner?
>
> Someone who owns full copyright in a work (a program or anything else)
> can relicense specific copies under any license(s) they want -- that's
> what being the copyright owner means.  A person who *receives* a copy
> can only redistribute under the terms of the license they received it
> under, if they are not the copyright owner.
>
> I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice, however.  It is simply
> my lay person's understanding of the situation.
>
> Best,
> -Karl
>



-- 
______________________
<http://www.marhaonline.com>IT Consulting, training & solutions development

The best OS you can probably find: http://ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20110418/3d7c52b5/attachment.html>